Thread O Mass Shootings

[mcdougall(4)]

Jesus wept

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/374724-florida-lawmakers-reject-motion-to-consider-bill-that-would-ban-assault?amp&__twitter_impression=true

[mcdougall(4)]

Yes.

 

Thats why some of the states with the highest gun ownership have the lowest % of mass shootings.

Yeah but if you don't have a semi automatic rifle...no shooting not lowest %

[Ke1t]

This daft cunt Tory voter reduced to tears about losing her Tax Credits to the Tories after voting for them.

 

They're Tories. What the fuck did you expect?

 

 

 

 

Her suffering gives me pleasure.

[Ke1t]

Glass of schadenfreude Sir?

 

Thought Martin Clunes would have a stronger set of knackers in all honesty ...... Crying on Telly like that ...

 

The stupid are legion... you can't spare any compassion for them, because there are so many of them and they never learn. Most of the time their motivation seems to be pure spite towards other people, sometimes to the point that they will willingly fuck themselves over just to see the people they hate get fucked over.

 

In my case I've not only lost any compassion I had for these imbeciles, I actively lol when they FINALLY realise they're fucking themselves over with their stupidity.

 

You can almost see the dim awareness of what she did to herself creep slowly over her face as she speaks.

 

".......waaaaaaait a second!"

 

Yeah, we tried to warn you, dear.

[mcdougall(4)]

Thing I always amuse myself with is the idea that a politician is going to be different.

 

Corbyn sturgeon Trump farage

 

All in it for themselves

Yet stupid people put their faith in them

[Clydeside_Sheep]

89% of Americans support a law which would prevent a mentally ill person buying a gun

 

Incidentally, Obama attempted to do this in December 2016, but Trump signed a bill to prevent it being implemented in February 2017

 

84% are in favour of background checks for private sales / gun shows

 

83% are in favour of people on the no-fly list being banned from purchasing guns

 

Can you imagine, a scary brown man who has been put on the no fly list can go and buy as many weapons and ammunition as he wants, why isn't Trump all over this?! Oh right, he received $30million+ from the NRA during the election campaign...

 

71% are in favour of a federal database of guns

 

68% support banning assault weapons

 

65% support banning high capacity magazines

Interesting stats, what is the source / poll size etc?

 

Looks like just window dressing though.

 

There isn't a powerful and wealthy lobbying organisation arguing in favour of rapists though, is there?

Doesn't matter what the other side say.

 

Ive heard of the NRA, but I had to google to find (eg) the coalition to stop gun violence.

 

Why is that? Its not all about money.

 

America managed to overcome racial segregation, they could over come this too if sufficient numbers wanted to.

 

So why is there so much money spent on election campaigns in the States? Is it possibly because spending more money usually means you win?

Clinton spent about twice what trump did and still fucked it.

 

Republican politicians refuse to do the sensible thing, and argue in favour of sensible gun laws, because the NRA funds their campaigns. And less funding means they lose elections.

Its not a simple as blaming the GOP, theres plenty of pro=-gun democrats too. Its a strange culture.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

You're right it was a touch of hyperbole, the AR-15 ONLY fires 800 rounds a minute...

 

Tell me what citizenry needs that for 'hunting purposes'...

Of course no-one need such a gun for hunting. No-one even needs to be hunting.

 

But dont get up in fancy stats which can discredit the anti-gun argument.

 

Civilian ar-15s are semi automatic, so fire once per trigger pull. No-one could pull a trigger 800 times a minute. Even if they could, changing mags would slow them down and they could not aim so many shots. And no-one could even carry 800 rounds to start with.

[Ke1t]

In fact it IS as simple as blaming the GOP, since the money given to politicians by the gun lobby goes almost exclusively to Republican representatives.

 

For example from Politico

 

And the NRA themselves

[Clydeside_Sheep]

There have been gun control organisations or anti-gun movements for years, here's the thing they aren't FUNDED BY GUN COMPANIES TO THE TUNE OF MILLIONS AND MILLIONS, so it doesn't fucking matter compared to the HUGE SUMS THE NRA CAN SPEND.

 

They gave 11m + to Trump's campaign or is that insignificant...christ min engage your brain ffs.

 

Kids are dying cos of zealots and big gun money.

Theres something wrong with your keyboard it keeps going into capitals.

 

I dont doubt there are powerful pro-gun lobbys. The NRA has 5 million members, how many do the anti-gun lobbys have? (genuine question, I dont know) Who cares more?

 

America overcame institutional racism, dont tell me it cant overcome this - if they want to.

 

There are plenty of extremely rich philanthropists in the US, some of them might be able to be tapped to help the anti-gun lobby.

 

This article says NRA influence is over-stated and the problem is that people just obsess about the NRA instead of trying to win over the public with reasoned arguments and sound policy. I expect some of them do that as misdirection, in that they are keen to appear anti-gun but really have no intention of real action.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/16/nra-money-isnt-why-gun-control-efforts-are-failing-commentary.html

 

(PS - 11 million dollars is buttons in todays world. Lionel Messi alone earns 40 million euros a year.)

[Clydeside_Sheep]

There isn't a powerful and wealthy lobbying organisation arguing in favour of rapists though, is there?

 

 

Catholic church?

He's here all week (alas).

[Clydeside_Sheep]

In fact it IS as simple as blaming the GOP, since the money given to politicians by the gun lobby goes almost exclusively to Republican representatives.

 

For example from Politico

 

And the NRA themselves

So they are more pro-gun than the dems, so what?

 

Take Marco Rubio - since 2009, he has raised $91 million in donations, only $3m of that has come from gun lobbys.

 

approx 1 in 3 yanks owns a gun. Thats an extremely high proportion for a country supposedly sick of guns (and thats only legal guns, of course).

 

What do you make of this article:

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/16/nra-money-isnt-why-gun-control-efforts-are-failing-commentary.html

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Anyway I think we are all agreed that guns are bad.

 

And that mass shootings will continue to occur till america genuinely desires change (and we have seen significant change in american several times in the past - women entering the workforce, the end of racial segregation etc - so its not impossible).

 

So, if they want change - and I hope they do - then lets see it.

[Ke1t]

So they are more pro-gun than the dems, so what?

 

Take Marco Rubio - since 2009, he has raised $91 million in donations, only $3m of that has come from gun lobbys.

 

approx 1 in 3 yanks owns a gun. Thats an extremely high proportion for a country supposedly sick of guns (and thats only legal guns, of course).

 

What do you make of this article:

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/16/nra-money-isnt-why-gun-control-efforts-are-failing-commentary.html

 

That wasn't the point I was addressing.

 

You said one party is as bad as the other, which is patently untrue. I was merely clarifying your very significant error.

 

If you want me to address the 'so what' then that's an entirely separate issue, which I'll do here...

 

Red States are the bastion of Conservative voters. Conservative voters tend to be more likely to own firearms. Gun manufacturers see these States as their best chance for blocking gun legislation at a Federal level, so they pump disproportionate amounts of cash directly towards the State representatives of Red States. Since a Republican representative represents people who are strongly in favour of owning guns, it's not rocket science to understand the feedback loop that this creates.

 

You have Gun manufacturers feeding money to people who represent pro-gun voters who demand no gun legislation at the Federal level. No gun legislation creates larger profits for the gun manufacturers, and a portion of this money is fed to the politicians who represent pro-gun voters.

 

Being pro-gun, however, should not preclude government from passing sane gun legislation. For example not allowing people with diagnosed mental health issues to buy guns. But since that demographic is circa 20% of the population, perhaps more, the gun manufacturers absolutely do not want sane legislation passed. So the gun manufacturers pay the Republican politicians to block any and all gun legislation that might cut into the gun manufacturers profits.

 

As a result, GOP politicians routinely block any proposed legislation that is aimed at making people safer under the guise of protecting the 2nd Amendment.

 

And then a whole bunch of kids get murdered on a routine basis.

 

So... that.

[craegDAMH]

Interesting stats, what is the source / poll size etc?

 

Looks like just window dressing though.

 

Pew Research Report "America's Complex Relationship with Guns"

About 4,000 polled (2.8% margin of error)

 

 

Doesn't matter what the other side say.

 

Ive heard of the NRA, but I had to google to find (eg) the coalition to stop gun violence.

 

Why is that? Its not all about money.

 

America managed to overcome racial segregation, they could over come this too if sufficient numbers wanted to.

 

Of course it matters what the other side says, and of course money is important. If there is overwhelming support for change, what is your answer for the continued lack of change?

 

Clinton spent about twice what trump did and still fucked it.

 

She did, but she did win 3 million more votes. And Trump "spent" way more than is on the books because he leveraged his network of hotels and jets for his events and travel.

 

He also got the benefit of a lot of free air time from an incompetence media. Anyway, like I said, USUALLY, the better funded candidate wins. What a great system... money definitely doesn't matter...

 

 

Its not a simple as blaming the GOP, theres plenty of pro=-gun democrats too. Its a strange culture.

 

Over 90% of NRA funding goes to the GOP (or opposing the democrats). It's not a strange culture, it's a broken system.

[mcdougall(4)]

Of course no-one need such a gun for hunting. No-one even needs to be hunting.

 

But dont get up in fancy stats which can discredit the anti-gun argument.

 

Civilian ar-15s are semi automatic, so fire once per trigger pull. No-one could pull a trigger 800 times a minute. Even if they could, changing mags would slow them down and they could not aim so many shots. And no-one could even carry 800 rounds to start with.

So what's your point here ...

[craegDAMH]

This article says NRA influence is over-stated and the problem is that people just obsess about the NRA instead of trying to win over the public with reasoned arguments and sound policy. I expect some of them do that as misdirection, in that they are keen to appear anti-gun but really have no intention of real action.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/16/nra-money-isnt-why-gun-control-efforts-are-failing-commentary.html

 

(PS - 11 million dollars is buttons in todays world. Lionel Messi alone earns 40 million euros a year.)

 

Your article is an opinion piece by a right wing pundit. Three paragraphs in he starts using flawed logic.

 

Also, The $11m was direct contributions to Trump's campaign, they spent nearly double that opposing Clinton so they're true contribution was over $30m

[mcdougall(4)]

Theres something wrong with your keyboard it keeps going into capitals.

 

I dont doubt there are powerful pro-gun lobbys. The NRA has 5 million members, how many do the anti-gun lobbys have? (genuine question, I dont know) Who cares more?

 

America overcame institutional racism, dont tell me it cant overcome this - if they want to.

 

There are plenty of extremely rich philanthropists in the US, some of them might be able to be tapped to help the anti-gun lobby.

 

This article says NRA influence is over-stated and the problem is that people just obsess about the NRA instead of trying to win over the public with reasoned arguments and sound policy. I expect some of them do that as misdirection, in that they are keen to appear anti-gun but really have no intention of real action.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/16/nra-money-isnt-why-gun-control-efforts-are-failing-commentary.html

 

(PS - 11 million dollars is buttons in todays world. Lionel Messi alone earns 40 million euros a year.)

Your talking about grassroots organisations for change (like everytown) versus a huge well funded industry.

It's not an equivalent, they have no hope of outspending the NRA.

 

You talk of reason and sound policy.

There is no reasoning with the NRA.

 

We had one dunblane and fixed it.

They have a mass shooting every other month.

But do nothing.

[craegDAMH]

So they are more pro-gun than the dems, so what?

 

Take Marco Rubio - since 2009, he has raised $91 million in donations, only $3m of that has come from gun lobbys.

 

Again, the NRA's influence isn't just direct donations. They spend an incredible amount of money bashing opponents of the GOPers they support, and they are even influential in choosing candidates at the primary stage.

 

approx 1 in 3 yanks owns a gun. Thats an extremely high proportion for a country supposedly sick of guns (and thats only legal guns, of course).

 

You playing fallacy bingo tonight? No one is suggesting gun owners are sick of guns. Overwhelmingly, gun owners support tougher gun controls.

[The Boofon]

Glass of schadenfreude Sir?

 

Thought Martin Clunes would have a stronger set of knackers in all honesty ...... Crying on Telly like that ...

??

[Clydeside_Sheep]

That wasn't the point I was addressing.

 

You said one party is as bad as the other, which is patently untrue

No I actually I said it isnt a simple matter of blaming the GOP, because there are pro-gun democrats too.

 

(but by all means continue to attack your own skittles).

 

That GOP candidates get more NRA donations overall doesnt change the fact there are pro-gun democrats.

 

The problem is with US culture not any one political party.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

If there is overwhelming support for change, what is your answer for the continued lack of change?

That's exactly the question I have been asking you all along.

 

I have asserted from the start there is no change because there is no overwhelming support for it.

 

She did, but she did win 3 million more votes.

Thats irrelevant because its not the total number of votes thats count, its how the ordinary votes transform into electoral votes.

 

It's not a strange culture

Yes it is. Its very strange. If it was a normal place we wouldnt be having this discussion.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

So what's your point here ...

It was that you obviously know little about the subject and are susceptible to hysterical propaganda on the matter.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Your article is an opinion piece by a right wing pundit.

Says who? NBC is a middle ground outlet, and conservatives are slightly under-represented in its audience.

 

NBC News draws one of the largest audiences in the survey; 37% use it in a typical week. Its audience's overall ideological composition largely mirrors that of the broader public, though conservatives are somewhat underrepresented in its audience relative to their share of all respondents.

 

http://www.journalism.org/interactives/media-polarization/outlet/nbc-news/

 

Your response to everything is to start banging on about the right wing in politics.

 

The world is much more complex than right wing bad, left wing good.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Your talking about grassroots organisations for change (like everytown) versus a huge well funded industry.

It's not an equivalent, they have no hope of outspending the NRA.

They said Martin Luther Kind has no hope, and his movement changed things.

 

You talk of reason and sound policy.

There is no reasoning with the NRA.

Reason with the public, not the NRA.

 

We had one dunblane and fixed it.

They have a mass shooting every other month.

But do nothing.

 

Thats exactly what Ive been saying all along.

 

The reason they do nothing is because America cares more about the "right to bear arms" than someone else's kids shot down at school.

 

Another reason they do nothing is because people like you make excuses for them doing nothing, by asserting change is impossible due to the NRA.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

You playing fallacy bingo tonight?

No, rather your head works in a strange way.

 

No one is suggesting gun owners are sick of guns. Overwhelmingly, gun owners support tougher gun controls.

I didnt assert gun owners are sick of guns.

 

I indicated that guns are hugely popular, hence there is no real appetite to change the gun culture.

 

Tougher gun controls are not the answer to eliminating gun violence. Getting rid of guns is the answer.

 

If your kid was shot dead at school, what comfort would it be that the shooter had provided ID when buying his gun, passed a safety test and kept it in a locked cabinet at home? Or that his magazine only held 5 instead of 20 bullets?

 

No comfort.

 

If the US is sick of gun violence then let them get rid of the guns. Until they do that, I wont believe they really care about innocents killed by gun violence.

[craegDAMH]

That's exactly the question I have been asking you all along.

 

I have asserted from the start there is no change because there is no overwhelming support for it.

 

So you're just dismissing research which shows overwhelming support of strict gun laws because you don't like the answer?

[craegDAMH]

Says who? NBC is a middle ground outlet, and conservatives are slightly under-represented in its audience.

 

NBC News draws one of the largest audiences in the survey; 37% use it in a typical week. Its audience's overall ideological composition largely mirrors that of the broader public, though conservatives are somewhat underrepresented in its audience relative to their share of all respondents.

 

http://www.journalism.org/interactives/media-polarization/outlet/nbc-news/

 

Your response to everything is to start banging on about the right wing in politics.

 

The world is much more complex than right wing bad, left wing good.

 

Says someone who researched the author.

 

Also, you linked to NBC, which is a different channel. The article was from CNBC, a financial news network. So to rebut empirical evidence of the overwhelming support for gun controls you linked an opinion piece from a GOP supporting financial pundit.

[beer gut]

 

So you're just dismissing research which shows overwhelming support of strict gun laws because you don't like the answer?

If there was overwhelming support for strict laws in the US then there would already be strict laws. Its as simple as that. It's all well and good saying on a survey that you want stricter laws but if you vote folk into power with the opposite view then it will never ever happen.

[craegDAMH]

If there was overwhelming support for strict laws in the US then there would already be strict laws. Its as simple as that.

 

There is overwhelming support for gun laws, that is a fact.

 

It's all well and good saying on a survey that you want stricter laws but if you vote folk into power with the opposite view then it will never ever happen.

 

That would be true if it wasn't a two party system, but it is, or if voting was on a single issue basis, but it isn't.

 

The problem in US politics is that there are effectively no limits on political donations. Politicians aren't in Washington to represent their electorate, they are in Washington to represent their donors.

[mcdougall(4)]

What alternative do you suggest , Albert?

 

Not putting your faith in politicians, not thinking that this one who says they are different and cares about you actually is and does.

 

After the plebiscite in 14 we were promised 'new politics' in Scotland.

 

Same greasy pole sleaze fest exists.

 

Everyone is corruptible.